RE: Definition of and evidence for the holocaust
May 9, 2013 at 1:29 am
(This post was last modified: May 9, 2013 at 1:32 am by A_Nony_Mouse.)
(May 9, 2013 at 1:10 am)cratehorus Wrote:(May 9, 2013 at 1:03 am)A_Nony_Mouse Wrote: .
If everyone who confessed to a crime were convicted upon mere admission the more heinous the crime the more people would be convicted.
you can't find any confession because there was no one single person who killed all 6 million it were a bunch a fellas.....stupid nazi
Which is of course another reason why I was curious anyone would bring up a confession. But you have yet to establish there were six million missing after the war so whining about that number is meaningless.
The Nazis tried to destroy communism. Give them credit for doing something right.
[quote who is your nazi boss im guessing..... matt giwer???
[/quote]
Did no one tell you I be he? All this time and you did not know? Pay attention.
(May 9, 2013 at 1:11 am)popeyespappy Wrote: I a straw man the best your can Mouse?
I prefer to stick with an absolute requirement for physical evidence.
No one here has established the validity of the number or the cause of death. There is not enough to get an indictment in the US legal system. I assume the British system would not indict either without the essentials which are still not in evidence.